Two Types of ISR Commands Under Two Different Mission Intensities: Examining ESG Concepts
Loading...
Files
Authors
Entin, Elliot
Weil, Shawn
Hutchins, Susan G.
Kleinman, David L.
Hocevar, Susan P.
Kemple, William G.
Pfeiffer, Karl
Subjects
Advisors
Date of Issue
2008
Date
2008
Publisher
Language
Abstract
The U.S. Navy is developing new maritime strategies and command structures to guide transformation efforts, to ensure the security of the global maritime commons in the new network-centric era, and to fit the challenges of the 21st century. The addition of an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) commander is one such innovative structural innovation that is under consideration. To empirically investigate different conceptualizations of ISR officers, we contrasted an ISR officer who coordinated--but did not own—ISR assets with an officer that coordinated—and owned—all ISR assets under low and high intensity mission conditions. Four teams comprised of three active duty officers were assigned to coordination or command ISR conditions and participated in two 90 minute experimental sessions using the Distributed Dynamic Decision-making simulator. The findings show that when task intensity was high the percentage of tasks correctly processed was higher when the ISR officer was a commander than a coordinator. We also found attack accuracy to be higher and action latency lower when mission intensity was high and the ISR officer was a commander. Implications for command and control organizations are discussed.
Type
Description
13th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS), June 17-19, 2008, Seattle, WA.
Series/Report No
Department
Organization
Identifiers
NPS Report Number
Sponsors
Funder
Format
Citation
Distribution Statement
Rights
This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.